| 
Jun 21,2009, 01:59 PM
|
#1 | | It's phonetic! | PLOM hand for review.
Hey all
So, playing in a .25/.50 live cash game when we decide to do a round of Omaha, when this hand comes up.
Hero: Recently bought in, tight-ish image, bought in for $50, probably sitting at around $65
Villain 1: New to Omaha, not a strong understanding of hand values, but aggressive. Sitting in the BB.
Villain 2: No idea how he plays Omaha, or even if he's played it. Minimal experience from NLHE games show him to be a good player, tight/aggressive. Sitting UTG +1.
All stacks are relatively equal.
So here's the hand.
A MP player who is knowledgeable of Omaha, but loose / aggressive in general blind raises the pot after an UTG+1 blind call, making it $2.25 to go (this hasn't been uncommon, fair amount of straddles / blind raises through the night). Folded to hero who is in middle-late position (cutoff+1), who looks down and sees QJT9dddx, and calls. BB and UTG+1 (V1 and V2) also calls as well as one more in there.
Flop: Js 9c 3s
Villain 1 (BB) bets the pot, $11.25. UTG+1 (V2) re-pots it, essentially putting him all in for about $50, original raiser folds.
Hero has top two pair, and an OESD. Action?
Mark
__________________
Life's usually simple, just not always easy
| 
|  | |
Jun 21,2009, 05:49 PM
|
#2 | | spicy piquant
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 230
|
i think against any combination of hands that are getting it in 3way you're no more than like 30% to win. i think it's a quicker fold than you made it. possible hands utg had would be like:
combo draw (though i don't think that particular player is leading there w/ it)
other top 2 with an ace or something (likely)
bottom/middle set. maybe top set but it's super unlikely utg is leading with that either.
utg+1 probably has a monster combo draw or top set. top set is unlikely because he is a monster nit gay boy and likes to wait for safe turns (wait how do i know this??)
i haven't calculated it but i'm pretty sure bottom set no more than 25% to win against both top 2 and a wrap w/ fd 3way. fun irrelevant theory/estimate
Last edited by zoolook; Jun 21,2009 at 05:54 PM.
| |
| | |
Jun 21,2009, 05:55 PM
|
#3 | | 1 of 180 |
I think I might have to fold this...I can't see you being ahead of both players, and even if you are, they'll both probably have enough redraws that you are probably getting less than the equity you need to make this call. If the flop was rainbow whether than 2 spades, I might be more incline to call - but with this flop, I think I reluctantly fold.
Given your description, I highly doubt both players to be on high PP, thus the only hand you are really beating is a pure OESD and/or a pure FD.
| |
| | |
Jun 21,2009, 05:56 PM
|
#4 | | spicy piquant
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 230
|
this. get it in all day if it's like j93r
| |
| | |
Jun 21,2009, 06:35 PM
|
#5 | | comma man
Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,148
|
I didn't pay enough attention to see who was who in the hand -- but against average players I fold and I would consider reraising preflop unless this is going to be the only round of Omaha all night and you don't want to risk much of your stack in this spot.
On a rainbow board I instashove.
__________________
That level 5 trap really paid off...ship him the cookies.
| 
| | |
Jun 21,2009, 07:40 PM
|
#6 | | Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,755
|
Fold because of the flush draw, without that I'd ship.
| |
| | |
Jun 22,2009, 12:06 PM
|
#7 | | Living Legend
Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,079
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham  Fold because of the flush draw, without that I'd ship. | I find these answers to be a little weird. For two more outs you'd go from fold to call? Sans nut flush draw, your flush draw is likely dead.
__________________
13Cards is the worst thing to happen to Canadian Poker ever.
| |
| | |
Jun 22,2009, 12:51 PM
|
#8 | | Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,755
| Quote:
Originally Posted by BBC Z I find these answers to be a little weird. For two more outs you'd go from fold to call? Sans nut flush draw, your flush draw is likely dead. | I meant if the board was rainbow.
| |
| | |
Jun 22,2009, 01:04 PM
|
#9 | | Full PFC Member |
The math actually comes out pretty close on this one.
It all depends on how much of a nit you consider your opponents to be.
The re-pot comes out to $45. (11.25 + 11.25 x 3) So, you are putting in $45 to win $101.25 (assuming that the third player will call). You have to win 30.76% of the time to break even.
If you figure that the two hands against you are something like AKQT with a flush draw, and 8833, then your equity in the pot is around 28%.
So - it then comes down to a read. If you think the players will not shove without better hands then the above then it is an easy fold. If you think they will go in with worse, then it is an easy call. Otherwise, it's about even - do you want to raise or lower your variance?
__________________
One of us hunts donkeys...
The other one plays one for a living.
| |
| | |
Jun 22,2009, 03:09 PM
|
#10 | | Full PFC Member
Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: London Ontario
Posts: 91
| Quote:
Originally Posted by BBC Z I find these answers to be a little weird. For two more outs you'd go from fold to call? Sans nut flush draw, your flush draw is likely dead. | I don't think he's concerned with 2 more outs for him, so much as 9 less outs for his opponent. Is this what you meant, Graham?
Last edited by redoak181; Jun 22,2009 at 03:11 PM.
| |
| | |
Jun 22,2009, 03:12 PM
|
#11 | | Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,755
| Quote:
Originally Posted by redoak181 I don't think he's concerned with 2 more outs for him, so much as 9 less outs for his opponent. Is this what you meant, Graham? | Exactly  | |
| | |
Jun 23,2009, 08:18 PM
|
#12 | | Full PFC Member
Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Edmonton
Posts: 35
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham Fold because of the flush draw, without that I'd ship. | Definitely, on a rainbow board we have a monster and we should gamble. That pesky flush draw makes it a tough decision though. By the sounds of villain #1, if he has a non-nut spade draw, he won't be folding it. People with a mainly holdem background will see the pot odds (3:1 or so if you call) and 2 spades in their hand and rarely think that they could be up against a higher flush draw.
We very likely have the best hand at the moment, 33xx showing up here is pretty unlikely. Given their aggressive natures from a holdem background, there is enough of a chance that at least one of them is going nuts with subpar (ie, non-drawing hand) like AAxx, to swing this to a call.
| |
| | |
Jun 23,2009, 09:57 PM
|
#13 | | comma man
Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,148
| Quote:
Originally Posted by KoRnholio Definitely, on a rainbow board we have a monster and we should gamble. That pesky flush draw makes it a tough decision though. By the sounds of villain #1, if he has a non-nut spade draw, he won't be folding it. People with a mainly holdem background will see the pot odds (3:1 or so if you call) and 2 spades in their hand and rarely think that they could be up against a higher flush draw.
We very likely have the best hand at the moment, 33xx showing up here is pretty unlikely. Given their aggressive natures from a holdem background, there is enough of a chance that at least one of them is going nuts with subpar (ie, non-drawing hand) like AAxx, to swing this to a call. | Fold. I'm sure there are much easier spots to make money in this game.
__________________
That level 5 trap really paid off...ship him the cookies.
| |
| | |
